danverschild wrote: Over the years, I found this observation to be quite accurate. However, when push came to shove this BOD found a way to come together and to vote themselves out of office. And they did so for the good of the AFA, so good on them. Out of the entire board, there were only 5 +/- who voted against the restructuring and IIRC, some, if not all of them were first time BOD reps who had not seen how unwieldly and inefficiently the board went about its business.

While the board stood together on the re-structuring proposal, it was shameful(IMNTBCHO) how they went about their fiduciary responsibility of passing a reasoned, balanced budget. Even though the proposed budget was gobbley-gook nonsense, the board chose to pass it with almost no discussion and very little(if any) thought.

Rick

Bo Terry wrote: Does not matter I like them all.

T.N. Trosin wrote: Tom you was there.
Surely your not blind. But maybe you head was somewhere else so you could not see.

Here is some examples.
When the BOD took up the issue of Dave. Alot of the members for the BOD could not see where there was a problem. When someone tried to show where the problems were. They were shut down because of the rules of 2 min to speak and only being able to speak on an issue twice. Somethings take more expination. Someone asked for examples then the supject got quickly changed away from examples. No one could see that there was a lost in benifits, did not get my Nov/Dec issue of the PF did you? Lack of intergity, illegal recording of the now famous tape. The creation of a hostal working enviroment something that would get most supervisors fired in the real work force, resignation of Mike. Of course half the BOD could not see this or did not care. Over an hour of discussion what a waste of time for something that should have been so straight forward. What a shame.

The argument of the name change for the Intern Certificate (IC) to AF American Farriers Assciaton - Farrier. No one complane of the change in requirements just the name. No trust in the certificatiion committee.

How about the Worlds Blacksmith proposal. It took a whole hour to decide to form a committee to discuss this more. Sounded like a good proposal to shift the contest portion of the AFA to a AFA Chapter who speacilizes in running contests.

Then there was the budget joke. The demanding of appoliges because someone could not act civil to another person. Dave accasionaly walking out of the meeting especally when the discussion went against his wishes. The joke of the Treasure Report that had nothing to do with the finaces of the AFA.

A meeting that was suppose to start at 8am but did not start untill almost 9am and lasted until 6pm and had to rejourn again for another hour at 9pm.

The changing of the agenda by the EC the night before because they had not reviewed the agenda before it went out to the BOD members.

I don't think there is a need more do you?

Gary_Miller wrote:
That was rude!
Gary_Miller wrote:
Gary, I got updated at my local association meeting this week. I heard the same topics, just without all the drama and personal views. Meeting can get pretty deep, you already know this being former Active Duty Air Force. You also know that it is not healthy to go back to the troops and whine and ***** about how the meeting afterwards.

The WCB (World Champion Blacksmith) issue. At my associations meeting this Wed. night this issue was lightly brought up and in a very civil manner. One point was the AFA's successfull turn out at the conventions. The reasoning for success is because they hold something for everyone. blacksmith competition, lectures and vendors. Is it wise to let one of these things go? What would the impact be on the AFA in the future? It is my understanding conventions are booked way in advance (like couple of years)along with a deposit for required space. If for some reason the WCB could not keep their commitment to the AFA, this would be a huge loss of income and a significant impact on the convention. To me it would be best for the AFA to keep competitions and the WCB to do their thing independantly.

How about World Champion Blacksmith at calgary that has been going on for years? How is it these two orginizations can have the same name?

The change from Intern Certification to AFA Farrier certification sounds like a good idea to me. This eliminates the stigma of the word Intern. Never liked that title.

The issue with Dave, needs to be let go. Time to move on. Dave has shook up the AFA and it needed to be done. Would be interesting to see what changes have been made in the AFA because of his leadership.

Anyways, meeting can get pretty hot and heavy. Town Hall meetings, any government meetings and debates. Corporation, military, small clubs, whatever, it is normal for meetings to get pretty intense. Not a bad thing, this means people care and are thinking. Being a part of the process of change.

Phil Armitage wrote: Maybe but the question was ******.
Phil Armitage wrote: Good, I'm glad your BOD rep is doing his jobPhil Armitage wrote: I stated no drama or personal view just facts as I observed them.Phil Armitage wrote: There is a big diffrence here and you know it. In the military the commander goes around the table in an organized manner. Gets everyones veiws then make a dicission based on the information he has. The shop cheif does not whine to the troops because he supports the commanders decision even if he does not agree.
Phil Armitage wrote: you must of not got the correct facts or you would think other wise. All the WCB wants to do is make the convention the Blacksmith finals. The hold competitions through out the year in diffrent loctions in an organized fassion. Supplying all the forges, anvils, Ect.. All the competors do is bring their hand tools. Competors earn points based on their standings at a competion. If there are 60 competors the winner gets 60 points the person in last place gets 1 point. Just like the PRCA a competor does not have to make all competions in order to qualify for the finals and the selection of the team. If you want more acurate information talk to Craig or go visit the WBC web site. There are over 300 members of the WBC.
Phil Armitage wrote: Don't have the answer. Maybe Craig or someone else who know will comment here.
Phil Armitage wrote: It sounded like a good idea to me. The joke was the 35 min discussion that insued on just what it should be called, what a waste of time. Especally after the Certification Committee had discussed it at lenght.
Phil Armitage wrote: Just because there was not enoough votes to oust Dave does not mean it did not happen. The vote was taken and we should move on with business. However, we should never forget, least it should happen again.
Phil Armitage wrote: He certainly has!!!!!!!!
Phil Armitage wrote: It sure will!!!!!!!!
Phil Armitage wrote: your right here meetings can get heated. But out of all the meeting I have atended throught my life. I had never seen anything like and AFA BOD meeting it was an experiance sitting in on a meeting with a munch of egotistical farriers.

Phil Armitage wrote:
Was anybody at that meeting that's competed at the convention in recent years?

The last one I did was Chattanooga. It took about $1500 (Entry fees, convention registration, propane tickets, travel expenses) and 8 days of my time. Four days of that was driving there and back with all my equipment. It's SO much easier and more economical to fly out with hand tools and work on the WCB's stations. :cool:

The go-round format WCB is running gives you a chance to watch some of the rounds you're not in or even go to some of the convention lectures that I'm always paying for but never get to watch.

The teamwork aspect and working in coke instead of propane are also preferable to the AFA's current format.

Hey Roy, I have no clue I am new to all this. I get the stuff in the mail from the WCB and try to listen to what people have to say about it. Would like to learn more about it myself. I have no idea if anyone at the meeting has recently competed at the convention. Thanks for more info though.

Gary_Miller wrote: No but obviously I had other priorities

First of all you can't pin the 2 minute rule on anybody but a dead man, however the afa board has worked within those peramiters rather than comming with prepared statements.

Second, the president had his day in court the fact that you view it as a waste of time and i viewed it as a cathatric exersise that the board needed to experaince it is a version of the half empty half full rule.

It's not that the board doesn't trust anybody, this goes back to the transparicy issue that was humped up by all the candidates. If the committees would prepare us with, i don't know written notice or something like that, it would be nice. Fact of the matter is that it is more than a name change and I am actually for that.


I will admit that starting the meeting late bugged me also

Fact of the matter Gary was that we didn't see the agenda until after it went to the board and the fact that only two item were out of order and were placed in proper order by the EC with out objection as far as I can recall.

All in all what disapointed you I found to be a very benificial meeting, we passed restructuring, we got rid of the IC and the staff got a much deserved raise.

At this point Gary your dumping gas on embers hopeing that the fire of discontent will rekindle, let it go. The AFA is in a position to move forward and grow, jump on the team and help make it happen.

T.N. Trosin wrote: Question is, how are we going to pay for it? In the budget for 2007-2008, office payroll was reduced by $20,000.00 from the current level. A raise was approved, the President wants to hire a Members Services Director, we have yet to hire an Executive Director, no line items were put in the budget to cover such mundane things as FICA taxes, Workers Comp Ins, etc. So how is the money going to be allocated? And, when?

There was no line item budgeting for rent, utilities, or anything else of consequence. Real income, including that of pre-paid dues (dues paid for this year, before July 06) was not sequestered and accounted for. The income from dues was based on a membership base of IIRC, 2500 yet no one could offer a reasonable rationale for why that number was chosen. Line item expenses and income for the PF magazine were not included. Many committees had $0.00 budgeted. I could go on, but you get the picture.

It is true that the non-budget was prepared late and presented to the BOD the morning of the meeting and in effect, was discussed and approved after the one hour lunch break, but in that time, between Michael Joshua, myself, and a few others, 26 separate areas/items of concern were identified and readied for discussion. Yet the board voted to end budget discussion and to adopt the non-budget as presented. Making the situation even more impossible is the fact that with the board restructuring proposal approved, it now becomes the responsibility of the AFA, starting with the annual meeting in 2008, to provide for the travel, housing and meal expenses of the members of the new board. But there is nothing in the budget to accomodate that.

Had the board acted responsibly, they would IMNTBCHO, tabled the budget proposal and directed the Treasurer and the Finance committee to craft a budget that addressed these and other issues, and have it available for adoption no later than the first week of June, 2007. Since the new fiscal year doesn't begin until 01July2007, this would have allowed ample time for this task and a special meeting of the BoD could then have been held to discuss and adopt a fiscally sound budget for FY07/08.

As for the WCB, I really like the concept and I hope the committee is able to reach a mutually acceptable common middle ground. Done properly, all parties will benefit.

I think the AFA can and will move ahead. Just how much remains to be seen.

Rick

Rick,
As to your last post are you saying you foresee a budgetary problem on the horizon?

If that's the case the soap opera shall continue......
George

Sounds more like a total lack of due diligence in relation to financial planning and whether they meet the budget or not will be a matter of good luck because it sure as heck isn't good planning or good management.


Rick's suggestion is spot on, it would be prudent to get a good financial manager to do a bottom up budget build.

QUOTE BY GARY MILLER: you must of not got the correct facts or you would think other wise. All the WCB wants to do is make the convention the Blacksmith finals.

Gary,

Why don't you trust the rules committee? They already reviewed and discussed at great length the proposal of the WCB and voted it down.

If there's a need for the AFA contest to change, why not do it from within the AFA?

Why did the AFA Board appoint two principles of the for-profit WCB to negotiate for the AFA when the AFA's own rules committee had already decided that the AFA should not have any involvement with the WCB?

Furthermore, the motion to form a new committee was made by a principle of the for-profit WCB who sits on the BoD. This is certainly a conflict of interest and could constitute a less-than-arms-length operation under the laws governing non-profits. This could result in serious legal ramifications for the AFA and possibly jeopardize our not-for-profit status, and this is just the tip of the icberg….

For instance, all AFA members that would like to compete in what is now the AFAs contest would be forced to pay dues to the WCB and pay to travel and compete in qualifiers. In theory, this is a non-profit forcing its members to join a for-profit to compete?!?!

Have you actually read the detailed proposal of the WCB to the AFA? The information that you are posting on this board is not what was laid out in the WCB plan.

NOW LET’S BE REALLY CLEAR HERE: I am not in any way against the WCB in and of itself. However, I do not feel, based on the unsolicited proposal the WCB presented to the AFA that it is in the best interest of the AFA to turn over or outsource its long established contest for another company’s benefit….as the Rules Committee already decided. If there is a need to outsource the contest, where is the AFAs Request for Proposal (RFP)?

Sincerely,

Andrew

Andrew,
The AFA is a 501(c) 3 not for profit. The whole association is based around education. To outsource a contest that pays out big money will help keep the AFA true as a educational not for profit. Through out all your writings you never speak of what the competitors want? Who does the Rules committee represent? The WCB wants to keep the Championship with the convention at no expense to the AFA. The Rules committee stated that they didn't need any help, but it takes a small army to move 67 anvils, stands, vises, and forges in and out of the arena. The "we" and "they" thing needs to be addressed. Almost all the WCB members are AFA members and believe whole heartedly in the certification process. The WCB is about jacking people up and having fun, learning, and working hard. The whole idea of facilitating the contest for the AFA was just to stay under one roof. The WCB dosen't want to take anything from the AFA---- It wants to add! We are a new breed of chapter and a proud one at that. Enthusiasm is infectious man, there is a lot of bad stuff in the world and it isn't in the farrier world. Give 10 bucks to unicef and feel good about it all.

My phone number is 505-235 5952 if you want to know what the WCB is about.

Craig Trnka, CJF AFA# 2581 WCB #1

AndrewCJF wrote: Would you have expected them to do otherwise? I didn't.In your estimation, is there a need to change the contest? If so, why and what would you propose? If not, why not?IIRC, regardless of what the Rules committee had decided, there was a lot of sentiment infavor of discussing the concept. Just because a committee is against a proposal or for that matter, for a proposal, doesn't mean that committee's opinion should be accepted blindly.

Unfortunately, I was unable to be present for the re-convened BoD meeting where the committee was formed, so I don't know how many board members comprise the committee. However, I did have a rather lengthy talk with Craig and during the course of that conversation, I suggested that even though the two WCB principles were appointed to negotiate for the AFA, that they approach the situation as though they were solely representing the WCB. Thus, avoiding the perception of a conflict of interest or of negotiating in bad faith. Craig was most receptive to that idea. Whether it is followed or not remains to be seen. Further, as our conversation developed, it became clear to me that WCB wants to cooperate and to make the best possible arrangement that is mutually beneficial. Since a rising tide floats all boats, it seems to me rather foolish to be left in dry dock or out on the mud flats because we failed to at least try to catch that tide.So? Seems like a reasonable thing to do. And, since the BoD chose to admit the WCB as a Chapter, and give it a seat at the table, what's the problem?Why?Are you sure? Have you read the relevant law and case law? Do we have an opinion from the AFA legal counsel?What then is the "mass of the iceberg"?What would happen if the AFA should decide to hold its own series of regional qualifiers? What would happen if the AFA were to require that competitors at the Convention first compete at say SNEFA, WSA, Four Corners, TPFA, etal series of competitions? The competitors would have to pay to travel and compete in those wouldn't they? What if any of those groups required someone to join their organization in order to be albe to compete?No, no one is forcing anyone to do anything. Organizations have the ability/right to set the requirements. You don't get to compete at a USEF event without being a member of USEF or paying some penalty(Sorry if I got that incorrect, its been a while since I was forced to join USEF in order to compete on the "A" circuit).Which is why the original proposal was "tabled" and the committee was formed.The Rules Committee decision was a foregone conclusion. What difference does it make if the proposal was solicited or unsolicited? What is wrong with outsourcing the contest? IOW, what makes it sacrosanct?
Has anyone duely considered what the downside will be if the AFA fails to really negotiate in good faith?Perhaps, because of "blinders", the need has been ignored. Does the AFA routinely issue RFP's when it goes about its business? Has anyone sat down and done a comprehensive "cost to benefit" study of the contest? If so, where are the results? If not, isn't it time that that be done?

Rick

Rick Burten wrote:
It was my understanding that the AFA's Treasurer requested an outside audit and the BoD approved the current budget pending review and corrections according to the audit.